Jump to content

tupp

Members
  • Content Count

    778
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by tupp

  1. tupp

    Pocket 4K Time Lapse

    Okay. Great! Thanks. Does the Pocket 4K have an IR pollution issue like earlier Blackmagic cameras?
  2. tupp

    Pocket 4K Time Lapse

    I see. Well, Google really likes to know what everyone is doing and where they are doing it. So, if the camera has been bonded and then I turn it off and shoot again five days later, it is not necessary to enable "Locations?" Okay. That limitation prevents use of the Pocket 4K for many night time lapses. We'll probably rent a GH5 for the time lapse shots. Thanks!
  3. tupp

    Pocket 4K Time Lapse

    Is this the app? It looks good, however, I see a possible deal-breaker -- what is the reason for forcing users to have "locations" enabled?
  4. tupp

    Pocket 4K Time Lapse

    There is a special time lapse program that still photographers use in conjunction with Lightroom. I know more folks that have Resolve than that special time lapse program, so I will look into using Resolve. Thanks. I have been watching day-to-night time lapse tutorial videos. Sometimes they ramp the exposure manually, sometimes they use aperture preferred mode (especially on the A7RIII) and occasionally change and aperture, and sometimes they use a special controller. There are comparisons of all three and I'm not seeing better results from the auto modes nor from the special controller. So, I am probably going to ramp exposure manually. The only problem with using the Pocket 4K is: how do you get a 5-second exposure out of a camera with shutter speeds delineated in shutter "degrees?"
  5. tupp

    Pocket 4K Time Lapse

    That's great to know! Thank you! I wonder how the shutter angle is handled -- relative to the playback frame rate? That could be a problem a one sometimes needs to make multi-second exposures when shooting time lapse. Ha, ha! Whoever it is, that person must be very smart and resourceful! I am interested in all of those features. Where can I learn more about the app? Thanks! Thank you! It is good to know that it can be done in Resolve without having to obtain a special program.
  6. tupp

    Pocket 4K Time Lapse

    I am shooting for the first time with the Pocket 4K. I need to shoot a time lapse sequence as background plate, from daytime through sunset to night time. I have to separately shoot a subject for the foreground on a green stage. I would like to use the Pocket 4K for the time lapse, instead of renting a separate still camera. Has anyone used the time lapse function on the Pocket 4K? Can you ramp exposure (change shutter angle/speed, aperture and ISO) during the time lapse? If so, what are the shutter angle/speed increments (1/3rd of a stop?)? If the exposure can't be adjusted on camera during a time lapse, can it be done with a wifi/bluetooth app? If so, what are the best Pocket 4K apps? Any help would be much appreciated!
  7. I don't think that the tester moved the camera -- the tester was using a single zoom lens and he simply zoomed to change the focal length and then cropped into the image to change the sensor "size." On the other hand, in doing so, the entrance pupil of the lens might have moved forwards/backwards. The problem with such a test (other than the fact that the tester is using the exact same zoom lens for a comparison) is that he didn't test separate optics made for different size formats. That won't work -- it's an almost identical scheme to the above mentioned test in which the tester used a single lens zoomed to different focal lengths. To do the test properly, you have to use two different lenses -- one designed for a smaller format and one designed for a larger format. I would also suggest the the two lenses that you choose to test should be made for two formats of extremely disparate sizes. Comparing a M4/3 lens to an APS-C lens might show a difference that is too subtle for most to perceive, and likewise when comparing lenses made for APS-C and full frame. To make the difference obvious to most people, it would best to compare, say, a lens made for 16mm film to one made for 4"x5" film. By the way, I made those animated gifs, because I could see the subtle yet important differences between the two images that evidently escaped most viewers when the photos were presented one above the other. Even after gifs were posted, some folks could not see the slight, telling differences in focus and DOF, to my dismay. So, you have to hit people over the head to demonstrate a difference. Here is a photo taken with a camera that has a 14"x17" film plane. Aside from the peculiar contrast (it's a tintype), do you think that this look (especially from the focus/DOF) can be duplicated on a Blackmagic Micro Cinema Camera? If you could achieve an identical extremely shallow depth of field with a lens made for M4/3, that girl's shoulders would be a completely blurry mush. I love M4/3, but there are general differences in the look of different formats that do not involve "imperfections." By the way, at what point was it declared that lenses for larger formats have more "imperfections" than those made for smaller formats? Please not that the "equivalence principle" and the depth of field formula are correct in finding the two mathematical limits (front and back) of depth of field. However, neither of these notions account for how the focus rolls off outside of these front and back limits, nor do the equivalence principle and DOF formula describe any variances might occur within their two mathematical limits. There are variables that affect focus that generally increase/decrease depending on the format size for which the optics are designed. For instance, it is easier to put more lines of optical resolution into larger formats. The smaller the format, the more difficult it is to squeeze in the same number of optical resolution lines. When a lens gets near the practical limits cramming lines of resolution into a smaller area, it must certainly affect the look of the focus, which influences how the DOF looks/rolls-off.
  8. A halogen bulb is one of the two primary types of tungsten light sources. This type of lamp uses a thick, quartz glass "envelope" with a tungsten filament and halogen gas inside, hence the terms "quartz," "halogen" and "quartz halogen" -- all of these terms refer to the same type of bulb. The other type of tungsten lamp is "incandescent," which is the same technology as traditional household bulbs. Incandescent lamps have a thin, large glass envelope enclosing a tungsten filament and such bulbs are often filled with argon gas. Quartz halogen bulbs are significantly smaller and longer lasting and their color remains consistent throughout their life. Incandescent bulbs are more delicate and discolor as they age. Never touch the quartz glass of a halogen bulb with your fingers/skin. If you do, immediately clean the quartz thoroughly with isopropyl alcohol and a clean paper towel or plain cotton pad. Otherwise, the oil from your skin will impregnate the quartz and weaken it when it heats up, which can cause the bulb to explode. A 1/2 CTB gel cuts about 1/2 stop of output. On the other hand, if you are mixing ballasted daylight fixtures (such as HMIs), it 's just as easy to put CTO gel over those fixtures.
  9. On the contrary, tungsten lights are usually smaller and lighter than their LED counterparts with equivalent output. Plus, tungsten lights have no fans. The Lowel Omni is compact and light-weight with a high power density and a nicely focus-able beam, but a redhead would work, too -- it's just a little bigger and has a more limited focusing range.
  10. The DP light is a great fixture! I used two of them in a shoot just last week. With the FEL (1kw) bulb, you have a lot of punch that you won't find in most LED fixtures. Easy enough to use 1/2 CTB gels, so that the tungsten color mixes well with daylight. Keep in mind that the dimmer has to be rated for at least 1kw, if one uses the FEL (1000w) bulb or the EHF (750w) bulb. Completely disagree with you here. Omnis are GREAT lights! The reason why folks have had problems with the bulbs is that most of the bulb manufacturers initially did not include a central filament support, so the filament would break easily with shock, plus the focus mechanism on the Omni is exceedingly fast. When the FTK (500w) bulbs started to appear with filament supports, most of the bulb problems disappeared. However, one still should be careful not focus too quickly with an Omni light. The Omnis have a greater focusing range than the DP lights, and two Omnis easily fit into the space of one DP light. At 500w, the Omnis also pack a lot of punch for being so compact. I would definitely recommend Omni lights, and I always carry at least one in my lighting kit. By the way, I heard that QC dropped a little when Tiffen bought Lowel, so it might be wise to search for the pre-Tiffen fixtures. Yes, but don't lick them. Seriously, many of these "corn" bulbs have exposed contacts next to the LEDs, and you can get a little zap if you touch the contacts.
  11. Higher resolution is not necessarily the primary advantage of larger formats -- the advantage is the look. Our own @richg101 developed a medium format DOF adapter -- the Forbes 70. He used the OG Blackmagic Pocket (HD) with the Forbes 70, and the images were beautiful and distinct from smaller formats. In addition, or own @Gonzalo Ezcurra made the largest format DOF adapters that I have seen (14"x14" and 20"x20"), and he used HD cameras with it, but the footage was wondrously gorgeous.
  12. LOL!!! Actually, it would make me happy to have an 8"x10", reflective, DOF rig like the one created by Zev Hoover shown in the video above.
  13. We've had heated discussions in this forum on the DOF equivalency principle and on the difference in the looks of different size formats. I am on the side that there is definitely a difference in the general look of different size formats. I also maintain that the DOF equivalency principle does not account for the rate that the focus "falls off" outside of the mathematical DOF range and that this DOF falloff rate differs between different formats. Keep in mind, that the assertions above apply not to the size of a sensor nor emulsion, but to the optics made for a particular size of sensor/emulsion. If one compares the images from a 16mm camera to those from, say, an 8"x10" camera, the difference in look and DOF falloff is striking. Here is footage from a recent 8"x10" camera:
  14. Even though the format you mention may be uncompressed, the fact that it is 8-bit might cause banding artifacts to appear when you adjust the levels back down in post. Be careful and/or run tests in advance. In your NLE, you might find filters that have sliders and color wheels that will allow you to quickly change the Sony skin tones to your liking.
  15. ETTR is suitable for raw and uncompressed formats. Just be careful going by a histogram alone. If you have zebras, set them in the range of 95%-100%, and use them to determine your upper limit and to choose which parts of the image may or may not blow-out. Waveform is also good for finding the upper limit.
  16. Well, he certainly didn't invent tacky sunglasses and ugly shirts. Promo-wear has built-in hype, just because it is part of the fashion industry. On the other hand, the sunglasses and shirts probably didn't get as much hype as the RED One, which was vaporware for about 3 years. The RED founder and "hoax" mentioned in the same post? Oh, the irony... Some guy made a video about RED's special drives. I think he noticed something.
  17. Has anyone here bought a Panavision DXL? 😎 Whether or not someone on this site bought something has no reflection on the innovation nor quality of the item in question. I don't think that I ever actually knew what the rental prices were on any one of the different Dalsa 4K raw cameras. Nevertheless, Dalsa was offering 4K raw long before it was even a glint in Jannard's eye. Keep in mind that the first ones to break ground usually incur the most development cost and sink the most resources into a type of product. So, initially, a new type of product is usually very expensive. Often, someone with deep pockets sees the development, and swoops into a market to take advantage of it (and gets all the credit). How does that $15K, very late-to-market, buggy RED One compare to a $1,500 Pocket4K? Do you see how that works? Jannard just rode a wave. Raw video and higher resolutions were inevitable in cinema cameras, as was raw compression. He didn't invent really anything.
  18. RED was not the first to offer a cinema camera that shot 4K raw -- that distinction goes to Dalsa. Dalsa introduced their 4K raw camera at the 2003 NAB. At any rate, 4K raw and compressed raw were inevitable and obvious in the cinema world. At the Dalsa 2003 launch, raw files and the megapixels war had already been around for years in the still photo world. So, it doesn't take a genius to simply apply such notions to moving pictures. In regards to RED's wavelet compression, it had already been established in JPEG2000. So, it doesn't take a huge mental leap to merely apply the same compression method to another video format.
  19. tupp

    Lighting a clinic room

    Yep! That would be somewhat smaller than 15m x 15m! 😋
  20. tupp

    Lighting a clinic room

    15 meters x 15 meters is a small room?
  21. Up until about eight years ago, we said the same thing about the difference in the solidity of the look between a dolly and a Steadicam.
  22. Hollywood/Western Station FTW! Thanks for the link! Some of those shots are beautiful.
  23. @User, it appears that you need a lens support -- but not a big one.
  24. Agreed. If Panasonic uses an EF-mount once again (in spite of the fact that they already utilize the shallow and more versatile L-mount), that is truly something insane!
×
×
  • Create New...